Implicit expectations in sociology refer to unofficial expectations. Analysts have cited implicit expectations of the mental health professionals by people with mental disorder and the general society as the main setback to effective rehabilitation. In a healthy community, implicit expectations by individuals thrive and allow room for communities’ ever-changing conditions and needs. Medicine as a social activity has allowed all the unfit members in the society to receive treatment in a hospital. Hence, medicine can be termed as a contract between the ill members in the society, the society and the environment.
As a result, health professionals, social workers and mental health workers continuously seek to change patients’ ability to relate with their environment hence facilitating the improvement of their symptoms through rehabilitation. The society expects these professionals to rehabilitate fully the mentally ill persons neglecting their roles and participation. These persons require considerable attention from all the members of their society for effective treatment and rehabilitation. Through this therapy, the society expects mentally disabled individuals to regain normal mental health like the other members of the society. The impacts of such implicit expectations have negatively affected the process of rehabilitation (Andary 2003, p.2).
Competent doctors
Every member in the society expects the health practitioners to be technically competent in dealing with varied medical conditions. Moreover, the society expects the healthcare experts of the mentally unstable individuals to be immensely competent in their profession. It is with this perception that the society fully trusts the health practitioners in the rehabilitation of the mentally ill patients. What the society fails to realize is that medics alone cannot achieve mental health rehabilitation. The whole society’s participation in this regard is vital (Hinshaw & Stephen 2007, p.147).
Moral integrity
The society and the mentally ill patients perceive their healthcare givers as morally upright individuals without any flaws. The society accords medical professionals the highest possible esteem as compared to other professions. Self-sacrifice among the health practitioners treating the mentally ill patients is a moral component. However, such experts should consider the primacy of such patients to be paramount. The society and the individuals with mental disorder fully rely on the medical practitioners to diagnose, treat and care for the mentally ill patients. The doctors’ day-to-day activities have disapproved these implicit expectations, as they also are prone to flaws. In this regard, a doctor can be highly competent at diagnosing and prescribing pharmaceutical medications and not perfectly prescribe the psychiatric care, as a psychologist would have. Thus, rehabilitation has suffered considerable undermining as the society expects the medical practitioners to rehabilitate fully the mentally ill patients while neglecting other professionals’ the role.
Dealing with uncertainty and ambiguity
The society expects mental healthcare experts to handle uncertainty and ambiguity with considerable determination. Patients with extremely few objective tests exist predominantly in the mental hospitals, and hence their diagnosis may be unclear and uncertain. However, the society expects the health experts to provide diagnosis treatment and hope to the patients. These factors, in conjunction with ambiguity, induce pressure on the medical practitioners leading to multifaceted expectations. Consequently, with increased pressure, doctors may not fully concentrate on their patients. This undermines the rehabilitation program’s gains.
Stigmatizing
Health workers dealing with the mentally disorderly patients face stigma against the patients and the professional itself. The society normally perpetuates this stigmatization against the mentally ill, and sometimes on their doctors and psychiatrists. It is the psychiatrists’ desire that the society abandons its stigmatizing attitude in order to motivate and allow the mentally ill to recover fully. However, these anticipations are impossible in the real world and the health workers should acknowledge these prejudices and take actions to reduce them wherever possible. Similarly, the health experts’ contribution in the mentally ill rehabilitation should be non-stigmatized as stigmatization dents the psychiatrists and healthcare experts’ role in the rehabilitation process (Hannon 2007, p.30).
Focus on public good
The society expects the psychiatrist to act in the common good for the public and facilitate the mentally ill patients to become good citizens. In this regard, the society expects them to mould the patients in its perception. Despite this enormous contribution by doctors, the society has failed to realize their role in transforming the mentally ill person’s welfare, and hence their need to engage in the transformation programs envisage in the rehabilitation process. Therefore, we are all required to ensure that patients’ welfare, preferably the mentally ill in the social context, attains paramount considerations.
Psychiatric assessment
Repeatedly, mental health professions carry out psychiatric assessments on their patients. Through these assessments, the society and counsellors have portrayed several beliefs and assumptions about the human nature. More often, counsellors and the society assume that humans should only learn the specific skills that they lack. This is contrary to the health experts’ view. With these expectations in mind, they have found themselves equipping the mentally handicap with the skills that they perceive these individuals lack. In this regard, they have failed in imparting them with some vital social and life skills essential for their recovery (Moxley & David 2003, p.37). Counsellors and the society should stop believing that human attributes such as those common to the mentally handicapped are fixed and malleable, but rather try to be dynamic in their line of thoughts. Similarly, the society should never assume that an individual is terminally ill upon the diagnosis of a mental illness. Actually, psychiatrists argue that persons with mental illnesses shift between phases and pathological functioning (Stephen & Hinshaw p. 173). Therefore, we should all depend on the psychiatric facts to impede the society’s myths lessening the gains attained in the course of rehabilitation.
Part played by the health professions
Medical professionals have exhibited their implicit expectations of the society in several ways. By solely relying on their prescribed medications, some medics have implicitly expected the complete recovery of their mentally ill patients. These medical practitioners have fail in prescribing and implementing social therapies as a form of medication to such patients. Consequently, the role of imparting the social life skills back into such individuals relies on their relatives, families and friends (Browning& Philip 1974, p 102). In such situations, the relatives and friends are normally incompetent to deliver the appropriate therapy to their loved ones. This undermines the process of rehabilitating such individuals. Some health experts believe that mentally ill patients can never excel in their career and expect them not to actively engage in certain professions and tasks. Contrary to these beliefs, psychiatrist and psychologist have established that mental illnesses can facilitate better compassion among the healthy individuals (Stephen & Hinshaw p. 174). This illustrates how mental disorders can be of benefit to an individual. Studies show that some mental illnesses such as autism and Tourettes disorders cause some special abilities rather than consistent deficiencies to the persons involved. Therefore, for effective psychiatric rehabilitation, the process should entail the improvement of the mentally ill individual’s abilities and competence. Adjusting and changing their environment needs can facilitate the achievement of this cause (Anthony, 1984, p.40)
Medical practitioners always expect a mentally disorderly person to approach them for medication and care. Controversies arise when these persons seek medication and rehabilitation from other experts like psychologists. In such instances, the medical practitioners falsely believe that they are the only appropriate experts to diagnose and treat mental illnesses. With these perceptions, their expectations can be termed as implicit since the affected individuals can equally receive care from other relevant experts. In my point of view, mentally disorderly patients’ rehabilitation programs should dwell more on the social care rather than the medical care. This is true because mentally disturbed patients are normally distressed as expressed in their daily behaviours. Psychological problems cause their illness. To solve these problems, a psychological approach is suitable because sometimes the medical healthcare experts lack the methodology and skills required to tackle a condition.
A psychologist, rather than a health care expert, can easily diagnose psychological problems affecting individuals. Similarly, community members should provide the needed social care and skills to the mentally ill patients and should not only rely on the health professional’s help, but also play their part in ensuring effective patient rehabilitation. Thus, for effective rehabilitation, the medical experts should embrace all the measures of the community and the psychologist rather than undermining their role. In addition, medical professions should embrace all methods and standards used for diagnosing and treating mentally ill patients rather than developing standardized criteria for diagnosis (Liberman & Robert, 1988, p.67).
During the initial stages of rehabilitation, changes in the patients experience are observable from the instant of admission to the rehabilitation centres. Upon the patients’ admission to the wards, the setting should ensure the wards allow the patients to have a relaxed environment. In addition, the health care experts should treat these patients with the necessary attention rather than prejudicing them. Normally, healthcare workers expect their medication to be of help to such patients in the end. Apart from the medical attention, medics should demonstrate interest in their mentally ill patients and take their views seriously by administering therapeutic arrangements as required (Townsend & Mary 2006, p.23).
Although some mentally ill patients may not be certain about the success of the medication administered, they may appreciate its contribution if there is a clear explanation of its purpose at the manageable level. In this context, the acknowledgment of their experiences is crucial, and if possible, more attention should be focused on their successes in life rather than the consequences of their disorder. To achieve these gains, medical experts should change their expectations and approach when dealing with the mentally ill patients. They should expect little or no respect from these patients and display maximum respect towards them as the main concern should be the restoration of the patients’ self-esteem in the society. Through these expectations and methodologies, the effectiveness of the rehabilitation can be effectively enhanced (Wade& Derick 1992, p.45).
Evidence
Contrary to the health care professionals’ expectations, rehabilitation in the health setups, group-homes with shared facilities, provide effective means of mental rehabilitations as in-patients find them less restrictive than the hospital’s ward. Therefore, health care experts need to analyze critically their extensively believed expectations as allowing the mentally ill patients to live among the society has more advantages. This therapy allows the mentally ill patients to create friendship with the other members of the society unlike in the case of their confinement in medical wards. Similarly, the system will lead to low hospitalization rates. In Britain, a research was carried out to ascertain this suggestion and the effects of implicit expectations of mental health professionals (Leff 1997, p. 78). In this research, patients were placed in group- homes allowing the sharing of facilities. The effects of implicit expectations were scientifically controlled.
At the end of the research, the findings established the truthfulness concerning the group homes. This raised the number of such homes in Europe by more than a half over the last decade. With this breakthrough, the hospital asylum view expected and advocated by most health care experts has been replaced by the virtual asylum. The asylums’ provisions of homely environments to the patients facilitate their success. This has facilitated increased patient’s attachment to the environment and the members of the society allowing them to recover back their behaviours and habits in relation to their immediate settings. Through these effects of health care, correlating the rehabilitation achievements of both asylums can clearly illustrate implicit expectations.
Conclusion
Implicit expectations by the society and the medical experts have formed a network of professional activity undermining the rehabilitation process geared towards the recovery of the mentally ill patients. Since both groups’ expectations undermine the rehabilitation process, more appropriate measure are necessary to prevent all odds undermining rehabilitation (Baumeister & Alfred 1967, p.34).
References
Andary, L., & Stolk, Y. (2003). Assessing mental health across cultures. Australian Academic Press: Bowen Hills, QLD.
Baumeister, A. A. (1967). Mental retardation; appraisal, education, and rehabilitation, Aldine Pub. Co: Chicago.
Browning, P. L. (1974). Mental retardation; rehabilitation and counseling, Thomas: Springfield, III.
Hannon, F. (2007). Literature review on attitudes towards disability. National Disability Authority: Dublin.
Hinshaw, S. P. (2007). The mark of shame: stigma of mental illness and an agenda for change. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Leff. J. (1997). Care in the Community – Illusion or Reality? John Wiley & Sons: Chichester.
Liberman, R. P. (1988). Psychiatric rehabilitation of chronic mental patients. American Psychiatric Press: Washington, D.C.
Moxley, D., & Finch, J. R. (2003). Sourcebook of rehabilitation and mental health practice. Kluwer International: New York.
Townsend, Mary C., T. M. (2003). Sourcebook of rehabilitation and mental health practice. Kluwer International. Print. F.A. Davis Co: New York.
Wade, D. T. (1992). Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. Oxford University Press: Oxford.